Re: Howto tackle RC-bugs (and perhaps remove packages)?
One word before: I would like if a DD wants to "sponsor" the tackling,
means discussion me the action items before doing.
* Matthew Palmer (mpalmer@debian.org) [030724 01:35]:
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 09:35:37PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > The RC-bugs (and the packages they belong to) can IMHO be qualified
> > into different categories (together with the IMHO appropriate action):
>
> [...]
> > 2. RC-bug has an easy-to-use patch for some time, but there was no
> > upload in the last time. Ask the developer why, and after two weeks do
> > an NMU with the patch.
> After two weeks of what, no activity? You'll want to check echelon and
Two weeks of no response to mail.
> vacation status (only available to DDs) to make sure they're not just off
> sunning themselves, and are normally quite responsive.
Yes, I do want to check both, and I would rely on help by the
sponsoring DD in each single case.
> > 3. Packages with RC-bugs that have also a lot of other bugs and no
> > upload in last time, means they are unmaintained. In this case raise a
> > bug against the package in asking the maintainer (and possibly
> > sponsors) whether package should be orphaned and retitle bug to orphan
> > after four weeks (and send copy of orphaning to d-d) unless action is
> > taken.
> I'd be careful with that criteria - there are a lot of packages (like, say,
> dpkg) that have RC bugs, a lot of other bugs, and no uploads since 28/4/03,
> but sending an O: to WNPP is likely to raise a few eyebrows...
"in last time" refered to "more than a year". And of course I would
check that the RC-bug (and other bugs) aren't too fresh, of course.
> > 4. (For some time) Orphaned packages with more and/or difficult bugs,
> > including an RC-bug. Developers should be asked on d-d whether anyone
> > would like to adopt, and if no-one stands up remove package after four
> > weeks (that would mean to retitle and reassign to ftp.debian.org).
> Arbitrary rules like this tends to catch things which shouldn't be caught.
Nothing here is to interpreted too strict, that's understood. "For
some time" also referes to more than one year.
> Was it menu, I think, that was orphaned for months with big bad bugs?
> Removal of that would be rather unpleasant (although the argument that no
> matter how critical it is, if nobody wants it it must be useless is valid as
> far as that goes). Eventually it got taken over by an NM (IIRC, again), but
> a 4 week removal would have killed it.
menu didn't have no upload for a year. And if a package is seriously
broken, didn't have a upload for more than a year, and no one is going
to take it up - what is the alternative?
> My personal preference (just getting into Q&A) would be for carefully tested
> patches to go into the BTS, followed by an e-mail here bringing attention to
> the bug. Giving a complete package, ready to upload, doesn't fill me with
> joy, since checking that will probably be more pain. Others may see it
> differently, though.
Of course the patch must be in BTS. But, after the patch being some
time in the BTS the next step is making the new source package with
the patch (that involves doing the changelog etc.). And then preparing
an NMU. ...
Cheers,
Andi
--
http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/
PGP 1024/89FB5CE5 DC F1 85 6D A6 45 9C 0F 3B BE F1 D0 C5 D1 D9 0C
Reply to: